"stop this is rude, hes trying to save us all from harming the place where we live, hes trying to save us from dying of pollution and overflowing icecaps. you just dont care about our world.. dont you."
Saturday, October 20, 2007
Halleluiah, Brother Al!Watched 20/20 the other night. John Stossel did a "Give Me a Break" piece on the glotard hysteria. He talked to indoctrinated children (about 5-7 years old) who were terrified we're all going to drown when sea levels rise to the height Almer Gortry preaches about. They've seen his movie, you see. Of course, that's one of the many "facts" of his film that are wrong.Stossel spoke to some scientists who are "deniers" - one guy was on the IPCC but resigned over this issue. They had his name on the list of scientists who support their claims and refused to remove it until he threatened to sue them (they deny this of course - so who are the real "deniers"?).This same scientist pointed out that many members of the IPCC are NOT climate scientists at all - most are environmental activists (tree-huggers). It is not a requirement to be a climate scientist to be on that bogus panel and force your one-sided agenda on the rest of the planet.So, I guess my rant puts me in the group of people who "just dont care about our world.. dont you." Ya, I care enough not to let irrational people ram their nonsense down society's throat without speaking up about it.
And of course you believe 9-11 was an inside job, right?And the space station is broadcasting mind control signals that only a thin sheet of aluminum can stop.Okey dokey!
You are on the wrong site eng. The glowtard sites are over yonder at the London commie and alt looneyland.Those two sites are where you are going to get your nuttier than a fruitcake conspiracy theories.
I'll bet eng was one of those boneheads who amassed stockpiles of bottled water and food when Y2K was the latest hysteria.Obviously eng thinks it's a great idea to terrify small children by telling them outright lies - a British judge has ruled that Goretry's nonsense can't be shown in classrooms UNLESS the dumbass mistakes he makes are discussed and corrected by those showing the film - in particular the sea-level catastrophe he predicts.But it's okay to scare North American kids shitless - let them think that they're all going to drown. That's exactly what a lot of them believe thanks to people like eng, Goretry, etc. Really f***ing smart.
And eng - no I don't believe 9-11 was an inside job.You're a little confused. Let me see if I can explain very simply.I do not believe 9-11 was a conspiracy.I did not believe in the Y2K nonsense.I did not believe in the impending ice age warnings back in the seventies.Pick any popular hysterical doomsday ravings of the past 40-some years, and I did NOT jump on the misguided believer bandwagon.
your nuttier than a fruitcake conspiracy theoriesThe idea that thousands of scientists are in on some conspiracy is pure tin foil hattery. The 9-11 conspiracy theories require a conspiracy of hundreds of people. Your IPCC conspiracy theory requires thousands. I don't believe your silly conspiracy theory.Obviously eng thinks it's a great idea to terrify small children by telling them outright lies - a British judge has ruled that Goretry's nonsense can't be shown in classrooms UNLESS the dumbass mistakes he makes are discussed and corrected by those showing the film - in particular the sea-level catastrophe he predicts.Yes, the suit to have the movie banned lost its case. The judge did not ban the movie as bad science.The judge did not require the views of denialists to be given any time.The judge specified nine areas that were not as clear as they should be and could cause misleading conclusions. Those are to be explained in class. The judge did not ban the movie as the suit demanded. The judge did not require giving deniers equal time, or any time at all, as the suit demanded.That's exactly what a lot of them believeHow many of them? Or did you just make that up?But it's okay to scare North American kids shitlessYes it is. Do you want Halloween banned now? Ask them if they are scared of nuclear war. Are they? I would be.I'll bet eng was one of those boneheads who amassed stockpiles of bottled water and food when Y2K was the latest hysteria.No, but I made sure I had done my ATM withdrawals for the following week, and I bought my groceries for the week on Thursday Dec 30 instead of Sunday my usual day.Since the Y2K problem was actually addressed, I expected no more than minor glitches in scattered systems. Such as might cause my local area to have network problems for, at the outside, a few days. I was expecting something like the 2003 blackout turned out as the absolute worst case scenario for Y2K, and while annoying, life would go on.I know that the systems I had personally worked on did not have significant glitches. One would malfunction slightly if it was used in the last 15 minutes before midnight. I found that by testing it. Instead of doing a costly update, we sent a letter to all users of that system to avoid the 11:45-12:00 period. We received many responses pointing out that anyone who had a problem would assume it was because they were drinking, but they thanked us just the same.You must have been reading different newspapers, there was no "hysteria" among anyone I knew. Everyone was cautious, but I saw no panicking.As it turns out, one of the few systems that failed was the one that warns of Russian nuclear attacks. Fortunately the Russians did not trust their systems either.Most computers made after about 1996 were made with a real time clock chip that worked properly after the rollover and during it. But many systems, including nuclear early warning systems are quite old, and would be more likely to have problems.
I did not believe in the impending ice age warnings back in the seventies.I heard about the possibility, but never was it presented as likely. It was presented as "We think CO2 has an effect on climate. More research is needed to understand it."Hardly a "hysterical doomsday raving".I consider "end times" stuff from the fundamentalist bible literalists as hysterical doomsday ravings.
Say what you will about Scientologists, but they'll never stoop to suggesting you're a Flat Earther when you tell them you don't believe in the theory of engrams.
Eng, there are thousands of people who believe 9-11 was an inside job, Bin Laden being one of them. I would be very curious as to what your belief is on that theory?There was a whole planet, scientist included, who believed the earth was flat at one time. What is your take on that?History oft repeats itself, with silly people, who try to control the behaviours of others by invoking their silly gods. Al Gore's god would be Gaii. Eng, is that your god?
Eng, and what do you suppose happened to the dinosaurs? Do you believe there were dinosaurs? Do you believe there was an ice age? Do you think the Lucy and her tribe could have did anything to prevent it? I don't think all that dancing around the fire, and howling to the moon to their gods, would have helped Lucy and her tribe. Just as it won't help Goracle and you glowtards. Eng, how long do you figure we have to party hardy until the earth ends? Could you pray to Gaii, and put a good word in for us deniers.
Eng, I was thinking that you and the other glowtards could spice up your religion to make it more appealing, modern even.As fucking odd as scientology is, it has a whack of very famous and rich people adhering to it. I was reading all about that scientology religion, and your gaii pagan beliefs have some things in common.Perhaps you could adopt that auditing thing they do. The glowtards could make it their own. I know there are people out there if you give them props, they are more apt to want to join.The central practice of Scientology is "auditing", which is a one-on-one communication with a trained Scientology counselor or "auditor." Most auditing uses an E-meter, a device that measures very small changes in electrical resistance through the human body when a person is holding onto metal cans and a small current is passed through them.You guys could do that Eng. To make it all natural, have the glowtards hold the pop cans in their hands while standing under a tree in a lightening storm. If they get a jolt, and don't die, make them a god or goddess.Nothing like a miracle to get the crowds in.Silent birth and infant care.Hubbard, (the scientolgy god, akin to the goracle being the glowtard god) stated that the delivery room should be as silent as possible during birth. This stems from his belief that birth is a trauma that may induce engrams into the baby. Hubbard asserted that words in particular should be avoided because any words used during birth might be reassociated by an adult later on in life with their earlier traumatic birth experience.That means no screaming out, "fuck me this hurts!" whilst looking around to choke the man who was involved in this life experience....that couldn't apply to your gaii religion. No babies allowed, that over population law would be put in place.Eng.... The Church of Scientology claimed to have 10 million members as of 2006. That is ten million fucked up people who have held tin cans in their hands, and let some counsellor send electric currents through them. Their religion is not much different than yours. Except in theirs everyone gets rich, and lives the high life. No doubt a pyramid scheme, but most religions are.In your religion everyone forges around the forest eating bugs and weeds, except for the hierarchy, who drive around in jets and limos, telling the rest of us what sinners we are.
Do you want Halloween banned now?So, you're comparing Halloween - something children know to be made-up fun - to being told we're all going to drown because of wildly rising sea levels.Yep, that's the same thing.
Mariposa, Halloween is like the Goracle's global warming hysteria.Both of them are driven by consumersim. Both of them come from ancient pagan beliefs. Halloween makes a whack of dosh for the candy and costume industry, and Goracle has the glowtardians out purchasing the end of the world supplies, and high priced energy. The only difference being, is that we tell children that Halloween is just pretend.
Looks like you have accepted my position that the court case brought by the Exxon shill was LOST. They found MINOR errors but the attempt to BAN the movie was LOST.And you appear to have accepted my position that Y2K was a real concern, a problem that was solved by everyone working on it, just as climate change will be.And you must have accepted that the IPCC is not some conspiracy.It appears this way, since you are now off in the trees talking about fringe religions.The real test of reasonableness is this: I accept that the climate change theory could be wrong. It is becoming more certain, but it could always be wrong. The IPCC only says it is likely that human activities cause about half of observed warming. "Likely" means it could be wrong.Your inability to allow that it could possibly be true is what makes it obvious you are the retards.Keep sneering though, it's entertaining.
Eng, they are flogging it as settled science. Which in itself contradicts it validity. There is no such thing as settled science.At no time did I believe the world would end before, during or after Y2k. I do know people who were drawn into the hysteria of it, and I found it very comical. Are we suppose to thank you for saving the world from Y2k, as we are suppose to be thankful to the goracle for inventing the internet.That is what is wrong with you glowtards, you truly believe in all this consumer driven bullshit.
All science is "settled" until proven wrong.Most people who know anything about computer software, especially programmers, were concerned about running parts of programs that may never have operated before; i.e. the century change (which was also millenium change).I was never too concerned either, since it was identified, and being worked on. But I would have avoided flying during the rollover.You can thank millions of programmers if you like, not me. I was involved in testing a small system, that was all.And you can thank "the goracle for inventing the internet", but I don't know why you would. He only pushed funding for what was then called the "Information Superhighway". Helped create the internet. Just as Eisenhower created the Interstate system. Nobody says Eisenhower "invented" highways. But you can continue believing your urban legends all you want.Still enjoying your sneering, and unreasonableness.
...settled, means end of story. Man-made global warming is a theory, still be disputed, and studied. science in itself is an exploration, an ongoing study. To assume it is settled, is an assumption of arrogance, and foolishness.
Post a Comment